What of the other people who have been murdered?

Rev. Laura Everett considers violence in Boston over the past year:

Since the Boston Marathon, 235 people have been shot in Boston, 35 people senselessly killed in “those places, to those people.” How is that “Boston Strong?” I grieve the collective trauma, suffering and senseless deaths of the Boston Marathon. Yet how is 35 dead any less senseless? When we chant or buy “Boston Strong,” which Boston are we talking about? Boston is a divided city. Which Boston is strong?



    Free tagging: 


      My after school program did a

      By on

      My after school program did a project based on this concept. It's a common thought brought up after mass shootings/terrorist attacks, and I sympathize with the feeling. But we are talking about hundreds of people being, and excuse my choice of words, decapitated in seconds. I am the staunchest supporter of stopping street/gun related violence, but to try and discredit an event with those numbers just doesn't fit. The same sentiment was brought up after 9/11 in NYC. Thousands of people died in Lower Manhattan in a matter of hours, yet people still tried equating street violence with a mass killing of human beings. Both problems need to be rectified, but to put both in the same breath just doesn't cut it.

      fear of crime and helplessness are factors as well.

      People dont seem to rally around urban violence as much, because most people feel they are safe from that violence. People see something like the marathon and realize that random victims makes them think it could have been them, even though they are probably much more likely to die from an urban armed robber or kidnapper.

      Columbine did this as well. Since that school shooting, something like 75 people have died in school shootings (adults, kids, staff). About 1,000 kids died in 1999, the same year Columbine hapoened. But people want the school setting to be safe, and they are helpless if something happens to their kids there, even though there is probably a 500x better chance of their child getting murdered in another way.

      Also, terrorism is meant to

      By on

      Also, terrorism is meant to be a public display of violence. Urban violence usually takes place on quiet back streets in the dead of night (although, Boston has experienced a lot of day-time shootings lately). Plus, the latest gun related death in Boston was by a police officer, right? Makes you think.

      uh, what?

      By on

      " But we are talking about hundreds of people being, and excuse my choice of words, decapitated in seconds."

      Uh...since when did ~3 deaths become "hundreds"? And by the way: you do remember that the bombings might not have happened had they not pulled the bomb-sniffing dogs after the VIP spectators and top runners finished, right? Someone basically said "eh, we only need to protect the elite here." And people died.

      And we held up the people who made that decision as heros...

      "The same sentiment was brought up after 9/11 in NYC. Thousands of people died in Lower Manhattan in a matter of hours"

      The same sentiment was raised because such an incredible fuss was made year after year for 3,000 deaths in a city where 51,000 people a year die. That's roughly 140 people a day; 1000 people a week. We lose ~40k people a year to highway deaths. Where are the billions upon billions spent on improving driver training and enforcement? Same for heart disease, which kills far more....I think it's around 500k/year?

      The idea here isn't that we're "discrediting" the bombing deaths and injuries. The idea here is that all this "Boston Strong" crap is discrediting the homicides that go on in our city every week, and most of them - 70% or so - go unsolved. There has been an incredible outpouring of support, money, resources, publicity, etc for people who were mostly white and privileged.

      Meanwhile the homicides of minorities, mostly poor or poverty-level, keep rolling on. In fact, after the marathon bombings, there was a literal bloodbath of shootings and stabbings. Why? Probably because every goddamn cop in the state was in Watertown playing Hero, instead of doing their jobs.

      How many millions (tens of millions?) have been spent on securing an event that predominantly benefits white, educated, rich people?


      The original poster lost me at "hundreds decapitated."


      By on

      Maybe they meant trucks on Storrow on Labor Day.

      Last I checked, hundreds of

      By on

      Last I checked, hundreds of people lost limbs. There were more people affected than just the 3 who died. So yeah.... point still stands.

      I think what she meant was

      By on

      I think what she meant was "incapacitated" which is true - 100s of people were incapacitated within seconds.

      I think you may be missing the point.

      By on

      I am glad she poses the question to us: "Yet how is 35 dead any less senseless?"

      It is not that she is trying to equate street violence with, as you say "a mass killing of human beings" as in 9/11. She is making the observation that if one is to use the words "Boston Strong" along with all the feelings of one united that go with that, than why is there less attention seemingly paid the city's 235 shot and the 35 "senselessly killed", since the last Boston Marathon?

      With respect, neither

      By on

      does equating the casualty count of the Marathon bombings with the casualty count of 9/11. Sure, both were the results of terrorist acts that targeted innocent people, but that's where the similarity ends.

      Boston Strong

      By on

      We had someone shot two streets over about a week ago. There was very little coverage of it. Word through the neighborhood, it's a drug related shooting amongst rivals. The rumor is that the victim (dead) and his assailant are from another neighborhood.
      Many of these killings are the direct result of the drug trade. I don't have an answer or solution to this (I'm sure there are wise sages out there who do).
      But a really big part of going in the right direction is the cooperation of people in the neighborhood. The legacy of ''Stop Snitchin" and all the other ghetto code is a big problem with stopping the long running practice of the business as usual.
      The media has overdone the Boston Strong theme. I fear it will be diluted and there will be some kind of fatigue from this.

      Three things

      1) This is racism-by-denial-of-history and use of "ghetto" in a derogatory fashion:

      The legacy of ''Stop Snitchin" and all the other ghetto code is a big problem with stopping the long running practice of the business as usual.

      Gee, why would people in majority-black neighborhoods not trust the BPD? Maybe they're still upset about little things like this? http://www.dotnews.com/2014/dorchester-man-seeks-new-trial-citing-withhe... There's a lot more legacy here than those "ghetto" nogoodniks.

      2) When you hear that a barber got robbed, told the police who robbed him, and was shot and killed in broad daylight the next week, you tend to be careful about going to the police. You tend to be pretty darn cynical about the police entirely. People don't just withhold information because they think it makes them look cool.

      3) It's a true fact that Italian-Americas are not inclined to snitch on the Mafia, and Irish-Americans are not inclined to snitch on the Winter Hill Gang, and Anglo/German whites are not inclined to snitch on skinheads. However, it's much easier to rally the white supremacist trolls if you use language like "ghetto" and "stop snitchin'."

      While I can understand your

      By on

      While I can understand your distaste for the "ghetto" stereotype, you must acknowledge the fact that it's not white males killing other males, it's black males killing other black males.you can blame the BPD, but you should also acknowledge the lack of effective parenting and the "gangsta" culture that is rampant in young black males today. All I ever hear from the minority community are excuses, passing the blame to others and complaining about how unfair life is. Maybe it's time they start owning their roles in these tragedies and stop looking for special treatment and handouts.

      Our Lives don't matter as much

      By on

      This is pure racism, I realized yesterday that I hadn't heard to much about the recent death of Boston Police Officer Dennis O. Simmonds who died after a medical emergency at the Police Academy. However and with no disrespect the week after the Back Bay fire for 3 days our local news channels broadcast 3 funerals 2 White firefighters and 1 White Plymouth police officer. Officer Simmonds was also injured in the Marathon Bombing you would think with his death there would have been a bit more coverage of his Wake (which was today) and a lot more mention of him during these Marathon Memorials but again Our black lives don't matter as much.

      It was months after the marathon that I seen one interview with the Black Med student who also lost her leg during the marathon oh and she only got coverage because she received backstage passes to a Beyonce concert. Yeah our lives don't matter as much.

      Not quite

      By on

      I'm going to take this apart backwards.

      So, you didn't see the 2 articles in the Globe, one on the front page of the metro section a month and a half after the bombing and the other on the front page of the entire newspaper at the end of November, solely on Mery Daniel, or as you call her "the Black Med student"? Unfortunately, hundreds were injured, and yes, she doesn't get the press the Nordens or Bauman get, but as the first article on her notes "the deeply private Daniel eschewed attention." And, yes, she saw Beyonce, but I guess that's all you wanted to read about her.

      As for officer Simmonds, it's a tragedy that he died before his time. The difference is that he died of a medical condition, while off duty. Ladder 33 lost 2 men in the past year, but only one had a funeral on TV (the other died of cancer, the other fighting a fire.) The turnout for Simmonds' wake, from what I read in the paper and heard on TV, for you see it was mentioned in the paper and on TV, was great, fitting for what a guy who was (from what I have read) a great guy.

      So, yeah, there is racism, and a lot of people have at least some racist attitudes. Perhaps you might see one of these people the next time you look into a mirror.

      I call bullsh*t

      IMHO, the Officer Simmonds death was very well covered, and in the news reports I heard and read, they often mentioned his injuries in the marathon bombing. So, I call bullshit on your claim that it wasn't covered well.

      If you want to compare it to the coverage of the deaths of the two firefighters, I think the circumstances involved had a lot to do with it. Let's take a look at the stories.
      1. Two firefighters, after going into a burning building and saving many lives, get caught inside and perish. A side story to this is the brutal choice an officer had to make in deciding not to send other firefighters into the building to save the two that perished. Also, these two officers were stationed just down the street from the bombings and at least one of them was on duty and ran down to the scene.

      2. A police officer who had been injured in the marathon bombing has a medical emergency at the academy and perishes.

      Now, you tell me: Which is the more dramatic? Which is the bigger news story?

      Sorry, but go cry somewhere else.

      Ok, merlinmurph...

      By on

      The coverage of Officer Simmonds death was not as well covered as the Plymouth officer who was recently killed in a motorcycle accident. This officer did not die in the line of duty (say in a shoot out). Low drama, right? Yet I have seen more coverage of his death than Officer Simmonds. So to say that her claim is "bullshit" is pretty crappy.

      Aside from your snide tone (having a bad day, week, year, life?), the original poster makes very good points. Remember Officer Donahue, the officer that was hurt in the Watertown shooting? Heard more about him and his recuperation than Officer Simmonds (who?), who was also injured at the same fight. If fact, until Officer Simmonds death notice and the following story that he was injured at the same shoot out, I don't remember hearing anything about him.

      I disagree with that statement

      The coverage of Officer Simmonds death was not as well covered as the Plymouth officer who was recently killed in a motorcycle accident.

      Not sure what to say, other than I disagree with that. Maybe it depends on when you have your radio on, or what you happen to be read, or what stories catch your eye. But I think I heard both stories equally. Maybe it's a case of selective hearing (something my wife accuses me of), where you hear what you want to hear and block out the rest. All I know is that I saw/heard a lot about Officer Simmonds.

      Nope, not a bad day at all. When someone makes false claims, I like to point it out.

      Hmm, we will have to agree to disagree.

      By on

      But I am glad you mentioned the phrase "you hear what you want to hear and block out the rest".

      And I stand by Lisa's post (which you called so nicely called "bullshit") that until Officer Simmonds unfortunately died, nothing much (if at all) was mentioned about him and his bravery (just heard he was to receive an award, for the same, next month) as compared to what was written and reported about Officer Donahue. They both were wounded at Watertown and both heroes, in my book.

      Since you like to be well informed, you can do a simple search on Wikipedia and see how many posts you find for Officer Simmonds, dated 2013. And then compare that with Officer Donahue.

      Point of information....the

      Point of information....the Plymouth police officer was killed in the line of duty. He was on routine motorcycle patrol when he lost control of the vehicle and crashed.

      Very funny.

      By on

      Really, you zipped right in with that zinger! You are quick on the draw, as they say :)

      One key difference between Simmonds and Donahue

      By on

      Donahue almost died on the 19th.

      But sure, injured-almost dead, they're pretty much equal.

      I don't want to come across as crass about the other injured in the blast or the cops injured in the attempted capture, but there is a difference between injured and almost killed.


      By on

      First off I challenge her Stats. If she is relying on the occupy the hood character, then they are wrong. Another difference between the Marathon victims and urban violence "victims" is that the marathon spectators were attending a family event. The majority of urban violence victims are either engaged in criminal acts while shot, in the company of those known to be involved in criminal acts, or have in the past been involved in criminal acts. I'm not blaming the victims, oh wait, I am. There is also a great deal of out cry when an innocent young child is shot, such as Jaewon Martin, or Jan Marcos Pena, maybe not to the level of the Marathon, but it generally gets a response from the moneysters, I mean ministers and the media. I guess it comes down to most of us (readers of UH) can't relate to the lives many inner city youth live, so we don't often think about the victims because we can't imagine being in a situation where we would be gunned down. I think we all can relate to going to a public place and for no reason being victimized. We relate to them because we understand the tragedy and the crulety and don't blame them. We don't understand an insult that turns into a gun battle or an armed drug robbery or drive by shooting in a rival hood.


      By on

      "Many of these killings are the direct result of the drug trade. "

      Keep telling yourself that. Many of these killings are actually *gang* related, which is not the same thing, and many of the *victims* are not the intended target.

      It's so much easier to be Boston Strong when you're white and think anyone who isn't white that gets stabbed or shot, "got what was coming to them."


      By on

      Says who? A rich white trust fund baby who learned all he knows about the plight of the urban poor from his social work 101 class? Same trust fund baby who rolls up his windows and floors it every time he accidentally ends up south of Huntington & west of Mass Ave?

      Trust fund babies

      By on

      So all white people are rich trust fund babies. Who's racist here?

      Reading comprehension fail

      By on

      Some are rich trust fund babies, and those are usually the ones proclaiming their ever-lasting love for the underclass and whining about everyone else around them being racist. A (white) working stiff from Dot or Rox complaining about trash and soiled diapers he finds in the park on a daily basis and/or thugs hanging out on the street corner selling drugs would be the racist one in their eyes.


      By on

      "... rich trust fund babies, and those are usually the ones proclaiming their ever-lasting love for the underclass...*

      I didn't vote for Liz Warren, how about you?

      Ok--just help me here.

      By on

      What are *gangs* fighting about if not drugs? I'm sorry but the difference between "gang-related" deaths and "drug-related" deaths seems negligible to me. Which isn't to say that there aren't many, many innocent-bystander deaths caused by this violence, but these guys aren't shooting each other over nothing.


      Wearing the wrong colors?
      Lots of reasons, really, none of them that make much sense.

      But it's about "controlling turf"

      By on

      for selling drugs and other activities, right? Not just totally pointless drawing lines in the sand, right? There's money involved, presumably from drugs.

      Don't forget that lack of

      By on

      Don't forget that lack of respect, or hitting on someone else's girl has been known to end up as murder. To me drugs play a huge role, but it's not the only factor.

      Legalize It

      Many of these killings are the direct result of the drug trade. I don't have an answer or solution to this .

      Legalizing the drug trade would end this problem entirely. How often do you see the distributors of Sam Adams and Harpoon getting into a street gunfight with each other?

      Pretty simple... except a lot

      By on

      Pretty simple... except a lot of drugs traded on the street are legal... like Percocet and the rest of the prescription pain killers. It is not illegal to have these drugs. However distribution of these drugs is controlled; which I guess is too much regulation for you. So what you are asking is that these drugs should be available over the counter at your local CVS or 7-11. And the price has to be cheap enough to undercut the street price.

      I agree with the first

      By on

      I agree with the first commenter wholeheartedly.

      Every large city is plagued by the same urban violence as Boston, so in that sense, and let's be honest here, it's nothing new and therefore not considered "newsworthy". I put that word in parenthesis because the media simply isn't going to cover crime that occurs on a weekly basis, and has been occurring at that frequency for decades. Yes, the city has a violence and gang problem, but so does almost every other American city. While we're making comparisons, at least Boston isn't Chicago or Philthadelphia.

      Again, it's just not worth the time of news agencies and outlets to relentlessly cover every homicide that occurs ad nauseam, and expecting the modus operandi to suddenly change seems pretty futile.

      Comparing the daily violence problems of a cities urban population, and a random act of terror using high explosives in a public area, simply doesn't compute.

      Major City

      By on

      Boston is a major city, the murder rate is WELL below that of the average US city of its size and 35 murders compared to those other cities is not bad at all. People don't think. Crime will never just magically disappear.

      So because our crime rate is

      By on

      So because our crime rate is lower than other places and crime will never stop we don't need to deal with it or pay respect to those that are killed?

      Spot onTruth

      By on

      Laura I commend your courage to speak about the divisive climate in Boston. Bravo!

      Kudos to Adam for posting this.

      By on

      Those of us who can recall the hypocrisy of the Charles Stuart case realize that Boston's mentality of valuing the lives of one group of people over another has always been and probably forever will be.

      It's funny how people get themselves worked up over once set of deaths, but completely ignore another. If you lose a loved one in a "terrorist" attack does that somehow make your grief more profound than someone who lost an innocent child to crossfire in Dudley Square? Should the former be entitled to distributions handed out by some morally mighty lawyer from New York who had the audacity to write a book entitled "What is Life Worth?: The Unprecedented Effort to Compensate the Victims of 9/11," while the latter gets nothing?

      Nine months ago, an entire town got flattened by a runway train explosion, less than 250 miles away from here. 47 people were killed. I'd be willing to bet that if you asked 25 Bostonians, not a single one could tell you the name of the town.

      Who cares whether it was a deliberate act?

      By on

      So some people's deaths are more important, depending on the way they died? If you got blown up in 9/11 then you can get a hero's funeral, a few million dollars and protective legislation for your family so they'll never have to work again, a couple of vengeful wars started in your honor, and mass public memorials every year thereafter, but if you get blown up due to the negligence of a railroad company then you're out of luck and nobody will care?

      My coworker's wife got killed by a drunk driver the same week as the marathon last year. Was her death somehow less valuable?

      All deaths are equally tragic

      By on

      All deaths are equally tragic....however the manner and circumstances of death deem their relative newsworthiness by the media. The more unusual the circumstances, the more media attention it receives. Sadly, black men shooting other black men in our cities, though tragic, is no longer deemed newsworthy taken individually due to the similarity and frequency of those events. Similarly, industrial accidents like in Canada and West, Texas, happen less frequently and get more press. But a bombing at internationally attended marathon has, to my knowledge, never happened before, hence the enormous amount of media coverage, both here and abroad.

      I think you're equating media coverage with the perception of how much people care about an issue - I don't think they necessarily follow.

      RE: Media coverage vs people

      By on

      RE: Media coverage vs people caring - I think things like the One Fund and "Boston Strong," which are pretty much omnipresent now, are pretty signs of how much the public cares about the Marathon victims, whereas in the Reverend's blog post, she mentions how the mother of the dead man had to do a whip-around in church just to pay for his funeral. There is no big movement in Boston to take care of the families of victims of the kind of violence that doesn't get media attention, but millions get raised almost instantaneously after a highly visible disaster. People are very eager to show how much they care and how much they want to support those victims.

      Lac Megantic, but then

      By on

      I live in Cambridge.

      There are so many dog whistles threaded through this thing the pooches must be half seized up wondering which one to answer.

      Bingo cards are close to full.

      Boston has had class, racial and cultural animosities throughout the nearly 6 decades of my life time.

      Admittedly the new version turns to sweeping it all under some rug.and some things that may seem like racism might be ascribable to yuppie self absorption.

      Which reminds me that we probably could use a new word for crass materialist airheads but we're all too busy, so yuppie will have to do.


      ...why not just call crass materialist airheads .... crass materialist airheads. All "yuppie" meant was "young urban professionals" -- which is a pretty diverse group in terms of personality traits, etc. Like any such group, it has a mix of douches and non-douches. What bothers me with this (as with "hipster") is defining the group by the behavior of its worst members -- and then ascribing these negative traits presumptively to anyone who looks like they might belong to that group. Looks like pretty lazy stereotyping to me. The key to an amicable city is rejecting stereotyping and dealing with each person one encounters as an individual human being (who is presumptively okay -- unless he or she proves otherwise).


      By on

      It's funny how all the "dog whistles" seem to come from those living in communities adjacent to "the ghetto", who are physically affected by its crime and filth on a daily basis, whereas the white guilt tears are always streaming from Cambridge, Brookline or some other very expensive, safe, thug-free (as in black residents are educated and employed) town or neighborhood. Why don't you move to blue hill ave and see how you feel in a week or so? I bet you'll be the next dog pied piper in no time. But then again, why do that when you can admire and/or pity from a safe distance, like a true do as I say liberal?


      By on

      Everyone's favorite "cambridge has teh poor too" excuse. The last few section 8 households who know all too well their ultra-liberal neighbors next door who just paid $600K for a two bedroom in a run-down triple-decker will have SWAT team roaring in if they hear loud music after 8pm, let alone witness any violence or drug dealing, and their ultra-liberal landlord will boot them out the second he sees a police car on his property. Dot/Rox/'Pan would be pure paradise if the poor there were anywhere near as well-behaved as those in Cambridge.

      Why even go to Lac Megantic

      By on

      A month later 24 people died in Moore, Oklahoma when a tornado struck.

      Yes, tragedies happen. People tend to view shootings or stabbings different than terrorist attacks. The sad truth is that "urban violence" is viewed based on factors. What was the age of the victim? Was it truly random? How many died in a single event (5 people, including a baby, executed in Mattapan will stick out in our minds)? And yes, race and socioeconomic status is a factor, so the white, female, professional woman murdered at Stony Brook sticks for a while but the homeless guy stabbed under the expressway gets a passing mention.

      We all remember Tiffany Moore. A lot of us remember Charles Copney and Korey Grant. Steve Odom lives on through the work of his mother. The list goes on.


      By on

      I highly doubt anyone would have shed a tear if those two nutjobs blew themselves to bits while trying to assemble their bombs. Following the same logic, why would anyone cry over the urban terrorists in Dorchester, Roxbury and Mattapan? There's plenty of justified outrage when an innocent victim gets caught in the crossfire, but nine times out of ten it's simply a case of urban terrorists thinning their own ranks. The dead one doesn't get to kill anybody, and the shooter (sometimes) gets caught and locked up - a win-win, if you ask me.

      OK, yes

      and when there is a rapper or stoner at the Garden, hempfest, sports championship games and parades, or other big events around town happening. Just seems like a big police presence when people gather and might have fun compared to daily life in more crime riddled areas.

      I'm curious the resources

      By on

      I'm curious the resources devoted to each neighborhood and total police presence. I wonder if, that despite the media profile public events receive, there isn't overall more effort directed outside the Back Bay.

      How do people...

      By on

      in certain neighborhoods deal with the violence that plagues their neighborhood every day?

      How do people cope in places like Northern Nigeria, where just yesterday, over 100 school girls were abducted by Boko Haram, a local militant group?

      Adrianne Hasley-Davis said it best yesterday, and I paraphrase here: Boston Strong is a a way to live and help one another.

      I feel the legacy of Boston Strong should be that neighbors help their neighbors. Strangers help other strangers. Do unto others as they would do unto you. Take care of one another.


      By on

      After the Boston Strong mantra came along I found myself taking part in/observing tons of discussions like this. Honestly, many of them quickly devolved into both sides fiercely debating who's tragedy is more tragic. The dynamics and causes at play behind urban gang violence (be it mafiosos, H-Block, or Whitey) are extremely complex and are rarely able to be summed up in a few very general statements and arguments (many of which are clouded by stereotypes and misinformation); the same can be said of terrorism.

      Others have already stated that you just can't quite equate someone making a bomb in their basement and detonating it in a public place with two guys settling a score in an alley. But is not having the local gang intimidating folks into not talking to the cops just a different form of terror? What about being afraid of wearing too much of a certain color? Or being afraid of being seen with so-and-so because he's in X gang and if folks from Y's spot you two together at the bus stop, you just might end up in the crossfire?

      Really, the thing that pisses me off is seeing "Boston Strong" slowly degrade into nothing but an ad tagline. Sure, many donated sales proceeds to The One Fund; but more and more it comes off as just a ploy to get you into a store and spend money.

      I would say the people

      By on

      I would say the people shooting each other seem divided against each other, and as a result, from the larger city as well. Their concern is not for the community but for themselves. Why don't we ask them what Boston Strong means? What is a city if not its people? If certain individuals want to kill each other over stupid stuff regularly, year after year, decade after decade, there is very little we can do to stop them I fear both in this city and others.


      By on


      When we chant or buy “Boston Strong,” which Boston are we talking about? Boston is a divided city. Which Boston is strong?

      is a good question. How can a divided city or town be strong?

      Well then, unite it

      By on

      Sell your comfy million dollar condo in Brookline/Cambridge/some other liberal enclave, buy a house three times the size for $300K in Bowdoin Geneva or Four Corners and donate the rest to charity. Don't just proclaim your eternal love for the underprivileged from a safe distance, go live and interact with them. Put your money where your mouth is.

      Boston Strong

      Although I am not a runner, I always enjoyed visiting the Finish Line area the day before the marathon to take a few photos. Last year, on the day of the marathon, I woke up from a nap to the horror unfolding downtown. Now I am confused as to why the "Boston Strong" motto has gotten so commercialized and meaningless. The media is telling me how I should feel about all of this. Maybe at some point it will be toned down a bit and people will move on.

      How can we call Boston Strong with all the violence?

      By on

      Thank you for writing this. It is what I have been feeling for weeks now. I work in a place where violence is prevalent and the children and families that are hurt by it do not feel Boston Strong. They feel very angry that their neighborhoods aren't safe and that their children can't play in a park across the street. I wonder what is meant by Boston Strong as well. There are people killed every day who should be hailed heros. There are children killed every day who go unnoticed. This year a child in my community was killed at the age of 9 and he is not being written about as a hero.

      It is tragic that anyone lost their lives last year at the marathon because it should be a safe place where people can celebrate but we have to remember that every day is this city that everyone claims in theirs children and families are torn apart by violence. If we don't care about "those people, in those neighborhoods," then we should be asking ourselves what does Boston Strong really mean?


      By on

      People killed every day who should be hailed as heroes? The ones who died in the line of duty and should be hailed as heroes (i.e. soldiers, cops, firefighters, paramedics, etc) are hailed as heroes. Or are you referring to the local thugs pumping each other full of lead? If you think those characters should be hailed as heroes, then you are the problem, and your neighborhood will always be a crime-ridden shithole.

      And many more people have been injured and killed

      By on

      if you add in motor vehicles. while not as many deaths in the city, the number of injuries is much greater than the number of shootings - and far more senseless and often preventable. if you add in the killing of animals by these things, all the second-hand problems of pollution and street safety (and people using their cars to intimidate other road users and pedestrians because they aren't moving "fast enough"), it really gets disturbing.

      Not to take away from the real problems of violence that comes with poverty - but this is another HUGE problem that we all seem to just have accepted as part of modern life.


      By on

      There's plenty of working poor communities all over the country, yet somehow a vast majority of violence somehow happens to take place in what all those alleged evil racists lovingly refer to a "the ghetto." Can't blame poverty for everything, bub.

      Yes, but

      By on

      Why is it the inner-city poor black communities, not the rural poor white communities, that are always a bloodbath? Is poverty itself racist?


      By on

      What exactly are you trying to prove with that article about Mexican drug cartels?

      Boston Strong

      By on

      I guess the question is valid; Are there 2 Bostons? The answer is yes. The Boston that rushed to the aid of those who had been injured, and or were generally concerned that their city was under attack. Then there is the Boston that was not aware it occurred, didn't care that it ocurred aor even took adavantage of the fact that it occurred being responsible for shooting 29 residents of Boston in the 2 weeks following the Marathon. Boston Strong is a cliche. It has become overcommercialized the way Never Forget was. It to will pass and become a faded or torn bumper sticker thoughout suburban towns across the State, while Roxbury, Dorchester & Mattapan will continue to face the daily violence that is carrried out in those neighborhoods. So what are the distinctions and is there only 2 Bostons are more pertenent questions:
      Black v White; owner v Renter; contributor v noncontributor; educated v noneducated; Urban v Suburban which do you belong to?

      Only 35?

      By my count using the maps hosted on this site, there have been 50 murders since last year's marathon. The same number is quoted by Esquire in an editorial. Not sure where the reverend got her numbers.